Category: Original videos photos music-slides

    

       This photo looks dark. It wasn’t dark when it came out in the phone and in the e-mail. (yeah, i’m lazy, i just snap the video-phone then email it then copy to C then upload to blog, no generational loss i am told cuz digital;  easy and lazy.)

        Dark. Let’s just say it’s a still from a film noir. A dark movie.

       Well, it’s actually multi-media journalist Luz Rimban showing us the short cuts in  Pinnacle, and Moviemaker  (non-linear video-editing), I don’t think i would have any use for it (except perhaps knowing whether something has been  tampered with and therefore not admissible), but i  kibitzed (am i allowed to conjugate that) or made “usyoso”, because i wanted to see her gizmos. And Luz used me as model- subject, which is not good for me, because you have to do what you’re told by the person behind the camera, you don’t have control it’s the filmmaker who has control, it’s his/her medium, and control is what it’s all about. I’m blabbering, bye. (by the way, those programs are really VERY expensive; they’re even more expensive than the hardware. and there’s no open source. why isn’t anyone inventing a program for video-editing in the open-source accessible to tne entire human race.)

        One more thing, I forgot, in the other blog, when it was just starting, a blogger/ emailer/ viewer named “stuart-santiago” asked why the pseudonym “chattel” was used there and asked whether it meant “slave” because she said that’s what she saw in the dictionary, and also, movable property. (I couldn’t answer it then without giving away that  I was a lawyer, etc. and when you start answering questions you’ll be  giving away details when it was supposed to be an anonymous blog). So now, here it is. I forgot about it.      

    Answer:

     

            I wanted to use a legal term that was monosyllabic or maybe of two syllables; really short; so, I thought of all those words that, when i was a freshman in law school, i didn’t know of, and came up with that:  it’s Title XVI of the Civil Code (I copied and pasted it here, I visited the chanrobles virtual library for the copy-paste);

Civil Code of the
Philippines

Title XVI

Chapter 5

CHATTEL MORTGAGE
Art. 2140. By a chattel mortgage, personal property is recorded in the Chattel Mortgage Register as a security for the performance of an obligation. If the movable, instead of being recorded, is delivered to the creditor or a third person, the contract is a pledge and not a chattel mortgage. (n)

Art. 2141. The provisions of this Code on pledge, insofar as they are not in conflict with the Chattel Mortgage Law shall be applicable to chattel mortgages. (n)
   

        Not only was it a small word, it also sounded like a name. and you could play around with it, like “chat” “chatting” of course those are entirely different, but most laypeople didn’t know what it meant…so they’d look it up, etc… and my real name has letters ch__.

        Also, in law school, I had a professor who taught Legal Bibliography (at that time , that was what it was called, I don’t know what they call it now, I’m sure it’s been updated to Legal Digitized Bibliography, something. Anyway.) Prof. Myrna Feliciano brought the old books to class, she put them in a cart, the really old, dusty ones, Corpus Juris Secundum, etc., to show us what they looked like (when I think about it now, that was such spoonfeeding, she should have just whipped us to the library everytime and made us locate a particular topic in a particular book.J she has an Ll.M from Harvard so maybe that’s how they did it  there). At the end of one class, I forgot what the topic was now, she said, “in the olden times, women were considered property — movable property…like so much chattel….” then she chuckled/ laughed/ snorted the Myrna laugh then walked away with her cart of books. I don’t know why I remembered it then, I just did (it’s funny the things you remember in law school) so there,  “chattel”.  

              When I’m blogging I keep forgetting I’m no longer “chattel” (no longer anonymous) and therefore have to “publicly disclose potential conflicts of interest…” (PPI expanded code of ethics).  

             

             (you  have to attain a certain state of  rest or stillness to remember the things you forgot or those you’re supposed to do. Anyway.)                   

             

        Why  do that? It’s just a blog. Well, a long time ago, the internet  was considered the new media  (no longer new), and therefore, we’d like to apply the same standards, and then some.                    

         

           But can’t you just say: “Why? I’ll be fair and objective and honest…” and  do away with the duty to disclose? No, because your readers/ viewers have the right to know where you’re coming from.                 

            

         So, in the expanded Philippine Press Institute code of  professional and ethical conduct, the following are possible sources of conflicts of interest: “1.involvement in particular activities; 2.affiliation with causes or organizations; 3.acceptance of favors or preferential treatment; 4.financial investments; 5.outside employment; 6.friendships.” (PPI expanded code of ethics).                 

                    When you look at that list, you might say, oh dear all of us have friendships and “particular activities”, and religions and beliefs, etc., what’s the point? Well, if you could avoid reporting or writing about subjects that you have a conflict of interest in, e.g., it involves your organization or your friend, avoid it; if you cannot avoid reporting or writing about it, disclose your possible conflict of interest just to let people know.                        

              So, here are what I remember, in relation to topics I wrote about in earlier blogs:                                 

      I blogged about the Subic rape case. Anyway, just for a full disclosure:  1998 the law office Public Interest Law Center (PILC)  (of which I’m a  board member), handled the Visiting Forces Agreement case on behalf of Bayan (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan); the title of the case is Bayan et al vs. Executive Secretary; Romy (the PILC president) said for  me to handle it, and the lawyers (Attorneys Marie Yuvienco, Jayson Lamchek, Edre Olalia, and of course, Romy Capulong) grilled me on the eve of the oral arguments from 9:00am to 12 midnight and they only stopped when I teared up (cried) because after 15 hours I couldn’t understand anymore what Jayson was saying about the VCLT (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) and Edre went to the white board and made drawings of boxes and cartoons so I could understand it; anyway that’s another whole story,  some other time.                                    What else, lemme see. The PILC lawyers were also private prosecutors in the Estrada impeachment trial. We’re also volunteer lawyers in the plunder case of Erap. In fact, in November before the impeachment trial itself, we signed the complaint in the plunder case, as complainants.                                  In the aftermath of Edsa Dos, PILC was also an intervenor in the case that Estrada filed to question the legitimacy of the Arroyo government; as intervenors, we attached the Angara diaries to show that Erap had been ousted (and did not resign, etc.)                       

            We also represented Nani Perez in the libel cases he filed against Willie Villarama (we didn’t file though against the journalists and media outfits because they were just reporting a quote). I think we also did some sort of informal memo of law or notes on the procedure for the extradition of Mark Jimenez (I can’t remember now). We’re also in the same team of the DOJ secretary and prosecutors in the plunder case, the team that handled the charge in the plunder case arising from using SSS and GSIS funds to invest in Belle corporation.                                      

           Oh, I also remember, PILC handled the murder case of Ka Lando Olalia (labor lawyer Lando Olalia was murdered in 1987, he was missing for a few days and when he was found, the body showed that his murderers stuffed his mouth with newspapers and he bore torture marks, they made him suffer before they killed him, i don’t know when the actual indictments were made) some of those indicted in that case  were members or alleged members of RAM (Reform the Armed Forces Movement) of which Greg Honasan then was the leader; I’m not the handling lawyer  and I can’t remember the details of the litigation. (I blogged about Honasan’s arrest a couple of weeks ago so that compels a duty). Anyway. When  the murder case was active, the office of PILC was raided/ broken into/ robbed  and the hard drives of the computers were seized; during the litigation some of the accused RAM members invoked the amnesty that  had been given to them arising from the coup attempts, and Raul Roco  said that there cannot be any amnesty for torture (even if one of his law office partners, our friend, Atty. Lorna Kapunan, was asked by her brother-in-law, Red Kapunan, to lawyer for some of them). Anyway.                               

           What else. Atty. Raul Lambino is Kuya Raul, he is a first cousin, and I’ve told reporters requesting for interviews on the people’s initiative about this,  in politely declining requests for interviews on that subject.  

         

         I’m a member of TOWNS after they gave out the awards and it’s an honor and I regret  I’m not able to attend the meetings but I will be at our Christmas party.  So, those are my two organizational affiliations, PILC and TOWNS. And U.P., I teach too. And was legal counsel there for five years. 

                

  

          What else. Those are all I remember and will state when the subject matter conflicts with anything else. Have i been unfair in my commentaries? you might want to take a look-see at the commentaries. But even if one thinks one had exerted extra effort to be fair, there’s a separate duty. So there. (oh, also, i have friends who were murdered during the Marcos dictatorship, and ambushed during the Aquino regime, so i guess you could say: “she’s been unfair in the commentaries! she has friends who had been murdered for their beliefs!”)

    

          i guess, well,  you’d be the better judge of that.